Car #: 54
Year : 1990 Posts: 711
I'm trying to decide on a new clutch, I've done a little research and wanted to see what you guys think.
I want to select a clutch that will last a long time and not tear up the Pressure Plate and Flywheel but I don't want to give up a bunch of HP.
ACT Clutches (1.8) 3000203 Full face Sprung Clutch Organic material = 3Lbs* 4224005 4 Puck Solid Clutch Ceramic material = 2Lbs 4224205 4 Puck Sprung Clutch Ceramic Material = 4Lbs 6224005 6 Puck Solid Clutch Ceramic material = 3Lbs 6224205 6 Puck Sprung Clutch Ceramic material = 4Lbs
*MazdaSpeed is now selling the 3000203 Clutch - This disc should shift good, be strong enough for our purposes. It should have a long life and not tear up the PP or Flywheel as fast as a disc with Ceramic pucks.
But is that worth the extra pound of rotating mass over the 4 Puck Solid Disc?
Anyone have any data on how much the stock disc weighs?
Data on HP gains or losses -V- clutch weight?
Data on Pressure plate and Flywheel life when using Ceramic material clutch discs?
Car #: 13
Year : 1992 Posts: 847
My research is pushing me toward a OEM PP with one of the ACT 4-puck clutches (leaning unsprung)... My decision is almost based on 100% weight due to the fact that I only run four or five weekends a year so wear it's not much of a concern for me over the season.
Also last year I ran solely against 1.8 cars and their tq advantage was very noticeable, so for me going light is the way to go. (there is no way this has anything to do with my cornering speed )
Regardless, I too would love to hear what others have done or are planning to do and why.
-------------------- Thanks, John Mueller NASA SM National Director http://www.Weekend-Racer.com #13 "Tiger Miata" - 2009 SoCal SSM Champion
Car #: 47/479
Year : 1992 Posts: 418
For my 1.6, I got the ACT 4 puck sprung hub with the ACT PP. It shouldn't be too bad to drive to/from the track, even if I hit traffic, and should grip like hell. It was 325$ for this whole kit, including TOB/PB. I didn't realize the unsprung hub was so much lighter or I may have just sucked it up and gotten that. I've heard some bad things about unsprung hubs being far more likely to tear through rear ends, but that's all anecdotal.
Region: NWR, OR
Car #: 30
Year : 1992 Posts: 8523
John, I'd suggest to you that the heavier-sprung pressure plate is far more beneficial than the lightweight disc. I run the same setup David describes, and I'm quite happy with it. If I didn't drive at all on the street, I might have opted for a lighter non-sprung disc, but there's no way I'd go back to a stock PP.
BTW, I drove a stock PP at the 25-hour, and we were continually having to baby it. At one point I could freely rev the engine in 4th, with no acceleration of the car -- I actually called in requesting that we do a mid-race clutch change (we limped it home without). Never again.
Car #: 70
Year : 1990 Posts: 768
I now run the Stock PP with the 4 puck Unsprung. Starting from a dead stop is much better with the Stock PP. The ACT PP and 4 puck was teeth rattling at times. I have noticed no slippage with this combo.
I ran an ACT pressure plate with their street disk for 99.9% of my races. No problems. One race weekend I happened to get a super deal on a used aluminum pressure plate with 4 puck unsprung disk. (legal for ITA) This was one of those $750 clutch combos when new. I ran it for 2 sessions but something was out of spec and it tore up my throwout bearing so I had to swap it out at the track.
This meant I had back to back runs on the same weekend on the two different clutches. Let me tell you it made a BIG difference. It felt to me very similar to when you run with a full load of fuel and when you run near empty. No DA installed for raw numbers but my lap times were about 0.3 second faster with the aluminum setup. Most noticeable was how much faster the shifts were. There lots of time right there.
-------------------- Colin MacLean Flyin' MacLean Motorsports